tv Government Access Programming SFGTV April 14, 2019 10:00pm-11:01pm PDT
analogy what was used to show where the plates are. this is one-half. other side of that girder has the other side. here's some pictures of that plate. you can see what we've been talking about for a long time. these are the plates that when they arrived in stockton, drilling some of the drills for this 370 steel. all the plates, the new plates were drilled in stockton. the existing plate on the two girders out there and first street, are getting drilled in place. they're bringing the plates after the new plates are drilled in and stockton and much more efficiently to do it.
now they're putting up and drilling out the existing girders. you can see in this picture, this is the team fitting up the plates to term plate the existing and ongoing with that process in prepping even to the point where sandblasting is happening. wherever girders were done, they are cleaning it up. this is the nice, proper sir fass between al--surface betwee. what are the next steps? project team will continue to do that facility wise. mark mentioned that by end of of this week that we would receive documents from one of our contractors. they confirmed that this morning. they are expecting that this week.
we anticipate to digest that and at that time we'll be able to ascertain if we need to go with any elements in the field. ultimately we anticipate by end of this month, a full package delivery to the p.r. feed for their review. depending on how the review goes over the next couple of weeks. what's going to happen in may, we'll complete the repairs and remediations by may. we also will have the shore removal. i'll talk to that in a second. the reinstallation all facilities in close proximity of girtedders in both locations, which makely means -- basically means we'll stitch it back. all of that has to go back at street level that will be very soon. here's our schedule slide.
the only real main change besides the first three lines has not changed. moving down to the permanent fix installation, i got two diamonds there. what's that showing tentative where we're projected at this point. at fremont street what we're projecting at that time. then same thing at first street we're anticipating by may 1st, around that time what would happen after that is a removal which is the next slide. we've been working with our partners at mt.a. to get closures to when we can start taking out that shoring in the middle of fremont street. fremont it's looking at this point like we'll start moving
shoring sunday night april 21st. that's we're landing in agreement with contractor schedule and m.t.a.'s requirements and resources. at that point, we'll start reinstallation of all the elements especially fremont street. the nightly closures will continue and they put back fire sprinklers, lights and everything has to go back in will happen at night. daytime commute will not be affected. the project team building continues in parallel. switching to the rest of the work that's still ongoing, the work to complete list is what we call it. i'll have a few pictures for the status. i haven't shown this pictures in a while. now they're becoming pertinent again. when you look at the west end
breezeway, far west end, there's still ceiling panels still require to install. there's quite bit of cell panels that's been majority of the subcontractor that's been out there and still out there performing contract work. shaw ally. that's what you're looking the ceiling light us and the ceiling is done looking down the concrete of the flooring. it's starting to be poured. there was a challenges with the electrical elements with the jaime carpenter artwork that was worked out. had work through a gfci. it's a device that's in all of our kitchens and bathrooms. ours is a lot bigger. they worked through that and those items are on back order. we'll get the concrete poured. as soon as those do show up, the lights and the benches and floor will be able to be activated. that's coming in due time.
we're able to put the concrete in short order now. the traffic signals. at first, fremont and beal, the contractor has done all his work. pg&e has parts on back order and cannot power our signals. that's why if you haven't driven through there and uyou see all e signals dark, pg&e they anticipate they won't show up until mid-may. we want to get activated immediately. it affects local businesses. it affects sales force tower getting out their garage. there's lot of elements why we've been waiting for a long time for pg&e to come through. that's why what's happening at the three signals that are on the project. there's other ceiling panels throughout the building as well too.
now switching gears out of the work to complete. back to facility wide validation framework. this is back total project again. this the funnel slade before i turn it over to ron. it is how we're handling the structure steel part. as we referenced, we're working on thompson middle fab to submit additional documentation which is what the purple stage is. i gave you the timeline. hopefully that's in the p.r.p.'s hands by end of month. as of now, what we have seen, there's no need to go to the green and orange. we'll still ascertain that as we
continue. ly turn it over to ron. >> they still closeout work that's not related to the beams. >> there's still contract work that has nothing to do with the beams. correct. ron will talk to some of the commissioning elements. i just talked to the physical work out in the field. >> your expectation it will be done before we open? >> there's some minor work that will continue. they are projecting by septembe. >> good morning again. thanks dennis for such great focus and momentum towards the remediation out in the field. just a reminder with this slide, these are the steps that are we're taking towards readiness, for reoccupancy. as dennis mentioned, we got
momentum with reaffirming the structural integrity of the building. the repairs ought to be done by end of april and before june, only thing that will stand between us and opening is whether or not we've made our way through all those other concerns regarding brittle fracture. did momentum on that front. review of test and records were completed in march. the documents we spoke of earlier is the deeper dive on the fabrication and piece information, shot drawings from all the different fabricators. it was slow coming at first. a wealth of documents came last week and as dennis mentioned, more of the fabrication and sequencing information is forthcoming.
they will inform up on brittle fracture. hopefully we'll get that resolved in parallel with wrapping up the physical work out there. we'll be revalidating the fire and life safety whenever it's back and stitched back together. it'll been interrupted by the repair opportunity -- activity. in terms of building management system commissioning, we got an early start in january and february. they worked through some issue. now we're back with the commissioning agent at the end of march and stepping into this first part of april to be position to be fully
commissioned and validated with the tail being at the end of may where we're addressing areas that are currently interrupted by the repair activity. we've brought back the budget slide. we're expanding our focus back to budget and closeout to wrap up this effort. in terms of the budget, we have currently expanded $2.134 billion, committed $2.116 billion. of that 2.19 is construction. in addition of legal cost take us to an e.a.c. of 2.203. obviously with the extended to protract closeout, we're
experiencing upper pressure on the e.a.c. which we are looking at as a counter weight as we discussed earlier, there are tools to address those that are responsible for some of this additional cost and will be deploying those tools fort forthright. contingency cost, over the last month has been about $.9 million drawdown. most of it's catching up with site work and also standing up some original as well as some of the late coming low voltage system. nothing really moving are the arrow there. you'll see that the remaining balance program reserve is at
$57.5 million. that does consume or include the projections of tenant improvement and legal cost that's baked in that understanding. closeout process. with this slide, the outline of the closeout is the warranty receipt. much of which is behind us, punchless complete and accepted is well under way. as dennis may mention, there are ceilings and concrete here and there that will take us into the summer. i intend to improve on. outstanding noncompliances are all but corrected with of course, the last one standing being the noncomplains of the
fractured beam. commissioning and training system, i touch on already. finally it's the full and final closeout of change orders. there was a time the joint venture pulled away from the table. they went quiet discussing closeout with the various subcontractors. we've talked and we sense come back to the table to reenergize discussions about closeout and pick up where we left off. the last i showed you progress on closeout. as we speak, there's eight trade packages that will likely close up once we wrap up the girder issue. those trade packages are engaged in the girder issue. seven trade packages are at various stages of closeout and
advancing 13 trade packages are expected or anticipated to be involved in the claims process. as we speak, 16 trade packages are ready for full and final closeout and awaiting those documents for my signature in the coming days or week. with three trade packages already closed, those were the very early site-related trade packages. with that i can take further questions or dennis can address more detail on the repair. >> chair nuru: any questions? no questions?
>> did you want to comment in regards to item 6? >> good morning directors. let go back to the director's report. it was related to the manufacturing process. i like to bring to your attention is the presser that took place in the hallway right after the prior board meeting. rather than giving you my own report, i'll read to you what the chronicle correctly report reported. quality control teams failed to
notice the other site. we're talking about the grinding. so they turned construction, quality insurance contractor to make sure the contractors were following the plan. to me as a member of the public, that's a classic systematic failure of the entire fabrication process for the steel structural package. so now, you have this presentation to do. we will reaffirm the structural integrity of the building. at some point, you need to understand that this is not a normal building. the entire building is actually a bridge. that bridge is submitted to bus
traffic. you have two choices at it point in time. you can say, we did good job, we're ready to go first of june and let's go. i want you to start thinking about going down the road, say six months or a year from now, you get another failure. you have to shut it down and then what? only way you can safely reopen this facility is to install a permanent structural monitoring package. we're way ahead of time before this is form. it just a matter of listening to it. if you don't believe me, you not
m.t.c. here, go ask them. ask them what happened to the bay bridge when it fractured right a month after repair. the old bay bridge. thank you. >> call your next item. item 7 is citizens advisory committee update. gri like to congratulate mr. derek hotel. he's our new tjpa chair. he was vice chair les -- last y. >> good morning directors. thank you for continuing to hear update and comment comments com. we're excited about new members
representing transit riders. our meeting tuesday evening was productive. given the closure of the transit centre since last fall, the c.a.c. is pleased with the retail leasing update by martin. it's 59% occupied about million dollars under budget and on track being 100% leased by end of next fiscal year. in regards to the pier review, comments and questions indicate strong interests in the review of processes and proceduressen implemented in phase one and the recommendations for future phases including the rail extension. we're counting on updates from executive director zabaneh and
future updates as well. the c.a.c. welcomes the temporary closure update. preparations completed and plans still on track for the june 1st completion of the repairings. repairings -- repairs. we're hopeful with improvements for the park area completed soon such as repairs to the walking path. c.a.c. appreciate the detailings and check balances in place and openness the cu updates are
communicated. thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll go ahead and call item 8. it's public comment and opportunities for the members of the public to address on matters not on the calendar. we can move on. we'll call the consent calendar items separately. [agenda item read] >> move for approval. >> roll call vote which we moved them from the consent calendar. [roll call]
this is aaron's first board meeting. from good morning. very happy to be here to present to you the budget outlook for fiscal year '19-'20. there's a calendar of what's going to happen. the budget outlook presentation then next month it will be a draft presentation of the budget and then in june, we would like to adopt the budget outlook gives you a general overview what you can expect to see next month. this year's budget, will focus more on operations as the transit centre opening and less focused on capital as phase one is closing out because transit centre is opening ramping up for phase two in the operating budget, there's administrative salaries and benefit and
proportion between operating phase 1 and phase 2 with heavy leaning towards operations. there's the administrative expenses, day-to-day things that go on, insurance, office supplies, those sorts of things. then there's the transit centre operation, which is the big chunk of the operation budget. there's professional services, mainly l.p.c. contract security, i.t., cybersecurity all included in the transit centre big chunk of the operating budget. this year in 19-20 we'll have debt service and operating. the debt service wasn't included in the preview that you had in your previous board meeting.
it will be included in the main budget. the debt service has its own dedicated revenue source it won't have an affect on the operating budget itself. into the capital budget, for phase 1, we're going to close out. the funding sources that has been identified for the capital budget will be using up the remaining amounts of those and then into phase 2, we'll have r.m.2 and r.m.3 money to phase phase 2. do you have any question about the outlook? i do want to add one more, that we will minimize effect of the operators as much as we can. [laughter]
i had to save it for last. >> chair nuru: thank you. >> call next item. item 11. [agenda item read] >> this is an agreement between the tjpa to provide the traffic signal work, traffic markings and other traffic related items. we're asking to extend the agreement one year to allow us to complete this work. >> i'll move approval. >> second. >> nom members of the public wanting to comment. [roll call]
the item is approved. call your next item. item 12 [agenda item read]. >> is this a joint presentation? >> this will be a joint presentation. i will let casey do the first few slides and then i'll present on the business. >> hello director. i'm director of government and community affairs at caltrain. just reminder, i know everyone is aware, it's good for members of the public, the remainder of where caltrain specifi serves. caltrain serves down to gilroy, it's a 77-mile route. when we talk about the project and improvements that go along with that project, it's within
that corridor. the park south of san jose is owned by union pacific. which is a freight railroad line. electrification details 51 miles from san francisco to san jose. traction power facilities which help regulate the power throughout the corridor. we're buying brand new electric trains. these are called electrical multiple units. we're we will have 19 new car train set. we got state funding for the project. we're excited to be replacing old diesel train and get these brand new high performance electric trains. the services will be up to 79 miles an hour. we'll have more stations and reduced travel time because they have performance attributes that are much better than diesel trains. we're restoring weekday
services. we'll have a mixed fleet for interim period. we'll have some diesel trains out on the corridor. we have plans to even expand that beyond what we're contemplating today. we'll have tenant service today, ace, capital corridor and freight operating on the corridor. they'll be able to run underneath the wire. we are in construction today. on the left, that's some of the infrastructure putting in the poles and the foundation, the far left hand corner is picture the tunnel in san francisco. on the right-hand side, those from pictures of the brand new electric trains getting built now in salt lake city. recap where we are with the schedule, this is a project that's been in years in the making. we started construction in 2017. we expected going into final
system in testing a inhave electrified service for people to enjoy and ride in 2022. with that, i'm happy to turn it over to sebastian unless there's question about this portion. >> good morning directors. thanks for having me. i want to present to you briefly on the cal caltrain business pl. although it's called a business plan, we're looking out pretty far into the future in the next 20 to 30 years to think about how the system can grow and change as our board adopts the long range vision for us and we'll develop a detailed business plan. we're touching on a range of different topics if this planning effort. lot of work which i'll present today looking at service options, different ways that the railroad with grow and change and ways we can operate our
trains. we're also doing lot work with the 21 local jurisdictions we run through on the corridor. looking at separations, community impacts and benefits. finally with stanford's help, we're undertaken organizational review which is looking at organization, service project delivery as well as governance. we're hoping to have this wrapped up by the end of calendar year. we're aiming to have the board make big picture decision on the corridor. somewhere in the summer of 2019. that big picture vision really is a vision for growth. casey mentioned, we are in the process of electrifying. growth and change are already very much on the agenda for caltrain. we know there's a lot of change coming in the corridor.
the question is really, how much change and how much growth and how will that growth manifest. we're asking these questions in part, we see our trains are getting full today. there's a huge amount of land use change in the bay area and in particular in the caltrain corridor. the graph on the right shows what's coming. these are the projections in our corridor. we're looking at sort of of 40% increase in human density around our stations by 2040. we know there are lot of those folks who want to raid rail. we're going to be much more connected system here in san francisco with the downtown extension with bart and san jose, connections through the state of california. we're looking at a much denser and connected corridor. we did little bit of unconstrained modeling. if we had bartlike service, how many people might want to ride it? the answer appears to be a lot.
we carry about 60,000 people today. if we had frequent bart like service, the model we'll be caring 240,000 people. that is comparable to what bart does today. from there, we've really looked at options for growth. those are options that build on all caltrain's existing plans and commitments. we have a baseline version of growth out in 2040 we're looking at finishing electrification pross and making commitments to high speed rail. we developed a couple of additional options that try to push the envelope, what would look like if we wanted to provide more service. these are essentially representations. fairly detailed representations of peak hour service for each of those service options. showing one hour in one direction of service on the corridor, starting at transit centre in the north. this is a representation of 2040
going down to gilroy in the south. the baseline is really lot of the service and schedules we've been working with for the last five or more years. it reflects full electrification of caltrain and high speed rail program. not whole lot more than that. we've also developed a moderate growth scenario that looks at what if caltrain added couple of more trains. we got up to 12 trains per hour in the corridor. we have caltrain looking at 15 minute express pattern and local pattern. we tried to push the envelope look at how much service we can fit on the corridor. we went to 16 trains per hour. this pretty much maxes out the existing corridor. there's not really much more we can fit on it.
as part of this effort, we've done some analysis working with staff from the city and county of san francisco to j.p.a. and high speed rail regarding how some of the service can work and operate at sails force transit centre. we've been working with the tjpa and incorporating the latest things they have. in general in the baseline, we believe that all 10 trains per hour can fit into the sales force transit centre. we're continuing to simulate these plans now. we've done these in planning explodes. we'r-- modes. there are some tight moves. we'll be looking at that closely. similarly, in the moderate scenario, we're looking at total of 12 trains. we organized those trains to make them work more efficiently. with that, efficient, organization, we believe all of them can serve the salesforce
transit centre. we're working on simulations to dig in that. when we get to 16 trains an hour per direction, just planning level analysis, it's pretty clear not all 16 trains per hour will fit in the single sales force. based on that, if we were to get to situation we were running that volume of train on the corridor, the last four trains would need to go to some facility for functioning. there are some potential conflicts in merging those trains back in the mainline. we're fairly confident there are solutions to work around there. that's what the northern terminal would function like if we get to 16 trains an hour. as i mentioned, we are moving
from planning out dynamic simulations that looks at how the facility works. we want to make sure we're planning and it's robust. that work is being done with full transparency and input from high speed rail as well as tjpa staff. we'll be engaged in analysis systemwide storage of maintenance needs. we talk about the north terminal whether it's at fourth and king, that affects how we move trains around during the day and how they are stored. that's a system wide conversation. as we think about how system grow, we're looking systemwide how the maintenance need to change. that's a program of work that will get more detailed and
continue probably for some tame. lastly, i wanted to highlight that we have done demand projections now we use the model to model corridor. that's when we found works best. we have projected demand on all of these scenarios. this graph just shows weekday demand for caltrain ridership. it was around 60,000 today, updated figures for electrification in 2022, we're looking at about an 20% increase. when we go to the downtown extension, we see 25% increase as we our system gets access to the core of economic activity and jobs. from there, depending on the different scenario, we're growing 161,000 at the base layne up to about 210,000.
we're excited about those number. it presents a challenge to us, there's some potential crowding issues we're looking at. as we're moving forward, one of the things we have to think about is not how many people could fight on train but how many people will make the choice and pay to do so. generally what we're using a as a standard going forward is 135% of seating capacity. if the u.s. commuter rails the rule of thumb in the past been one rider one seat. we see today that people are standing on caltrain and paying to do so. we do think standing is part of the future. we think that's a pretty good place for us to land for now. here you can just see, ridership projections with that capacity
constrained adjustmented. adjustment -- -- adjustment. just a few key findings. i won't go through these in detail. we do think that when the d.t.x. comets online and our train starts serve, that will be a major ridership increase to caltrain. will strain our capacity as well. just a few specifics about how we did the modeling in san francisco. we did assume surcharge. i know that is part of the current funding plan for d.t.x. we coordinated this through the staff. we consumed $3 surcharge starting in 2020. which is about $2.50 in today's
dollars. that's what we model. it does depress the ridership slightly. generally, we also think there's some other changes in san francisco that can affect raidership. one thing i say, sort of unknown for us is exactly how people may use the d.t.x. within san francisco. our ridership projections largely capture people as they use caltrain today. one thing we know with bart in san francisco, there are san franciscans who may use it like a subway to get to one part of the city to at. that type of ridership isn't probustlprobust -- probustly can our projections.
lastly, just to emphasize that we are moving towards a decision point by our board in the summer where they'll be asked to selects one of those growth scenarios a long range vision for caltrain to build towards. that's a decision that won't just be made on what the service looks like. we have raidership estimates. we want to provide a complete picture to the board so they can make a fully informed decision. the business plan, we have a website for folks who are interested this project. it's caltrain2040.org. it's a great resource for people who want to follow this process. just to emphasize, we have been doing lot of outreaches as part of this process. outreach with stakeholders and pier agencies.
we have a pretty robust staff group that meets regularly. we're trying to really engage our partnerses in this work. i'm happy to take any questions. >> director reiskin: from a process stand point, i want to commend situatio sebastian and m for this thorough process. i appreciate that. on the substance of the business planning from my perspective as the city transportation detector, i'm looking at the current state of the streets of san francisco and 101 corridor, looking at the piece of growth that's already happening now and already happen in the bay area projections for 2040. it leads to inevitable
conclusion that the high growth scenario is what the region needs. i'm hopeful that this bright mind who can solve the 16 train per hour issue at the transit centre. i do think that the burden for the decision and supporting and funding the decision should not fall just to the caltrain joint powers board. this is a regionally significant, if not state and nationally significant issue. i think it's really the region beyond just the caltrain board will need to be able to get behind supporting that vision. i say this, my concern when we start looking at the numbers, look, little overwhelming relative to the resources caltrain board. we all have an obligation throughout the region supporting
the future of the region being ail to get this level of train service to move up and down the peninsula. i look forward to the next steps. >> it's been a ton of work since this was launched a little over a year ago. to achieve the growth scenario that are being modeled, one of the things that is would inhibit that, in term of trains per hour is the issue of crossing and separationings. that doesn't make the number smaller. it makes it bigger. can you speak to that? i had the opportunity to be on a
panel over the weekend and made some transitional comments saying, the city are wanting more services but they want it on their terms. they want someone else to pay for it. that doesn't work when we're talking about a region. we have to work to this together. there's a follow-up question to that. >> the issue what happens on corridor is a huge one. on the corridor that cal drain owns, there are 42 crossings. few look down it gilroy, there's another 30. we're in the process of putting together all the capital costs of investments that will be required to support any these service visions and the cost of addressing separations. that is the biggest item.
san francisco has, i think, only couple of accurate crossings. what we'll be able to do in the business plan is frame the need and talk about that in relation to the kinds of benefits that this service can provide. i think previously on the caltrain corridor, lot of the conversations around crossing have beency by city. they've been framed very rightly and importantly as traffic and safety. they haven't been trained as projects that maybe unlock a transformative level of service. one of the things we're trying to do in this plan and coming out of the plan will be to frame the need and talk about maybe the strategic approach looking at this is a corridor-wide issue. how we can works a corridor to find funding and find ways to make these projects cheaper.
that's a substantial body of work and it's a body of work that brings billions of dollars in costs. >> vice chair gee: it's necessary to achieve the model, high growth, even the moderate growth in the presentation. the second piece that goes with that, if the region is not able to get behind substantial grade separation program, other part is the sensitivity analysis to the turn time in the salesforce transit centre. when you're dealing with the public, you get on the airplane all the time dealing with loading is not an exact science as well as if we're not global to grade separation in substantial part of the corridor. as soon as that happens, your model how fast trains turn
doesn't work. would suggest to me a backup location to store train whether it's fourth and king if needed to keep -- there's not enough room when somebody happen -- something happens on the corridor >> caltrain perspective is something will be needed at fourth and king. what that looks like and above ground and below ground, it's something we're excited about working with the city of san francisco and promp property owo understand options and trade-offs. as you point out in delay situations, we know that we're talking about a terminal for a very active rail service. we have to be able to find that. >> as this continues, to my colleagues in san francisco, i
don't know the answer to this. the question i have, do all trains have to go downtown? >> i don't know the answer to that particularly with the plans for south of market and the development out there. do all the trains all time -- i don't know. i don't know what the right answer is. >> i appreciate the comments. the grade we should be striving to meet this demand is a good problem to have in the region. with regard to this question, we will be working together, m.t.a. and agency and others on a citywide transit master plan and corridor study. just get it going. reallily to answer this question, i think as far as
d.t.x., the demand wants to distribute from that point as well downtown corridor. there's couple of markets. perhaps three markets. there's statewide, there's the within region market that caltrain brings. it's interesting that we find at least in the bart numbers from a few years ago, bart was turning about 10% ridership within the city. over 70,000. this is not nearly as extensive as bart. you make a great point. we want to work with you on this question. i mentioned from the high speed rail, high speed rail authority recognizes in their business plan, service needs to get to transbay and transit centre and that's the intent. the role of that station still
to be worked out. it's a good question director gee. we want to make assure i -- sure it works for passengers. finally on the question kind of a specific question to the demand projection. did you look at regional buses perhaps on express lane or any kind of scenario for the overall corridor for caltrain. not just looking at caltrain by itself? >> i did assume some level of services and projects in place. i will get the details.
>> director lipkin: certainly from a high speed perspective, our goal by mandate from the voters to get our services to salesforce transit centre. sebastian in your presentation, you did a marvelous job throughout this process. part of that excites me for kind of looking at the history of the corridor little bit, there was electrification plan for the corridor for a while. we're kind of at the point where that moved forward. the next layer on top of that, how we have high speed rail to it. that's what we're going through on the clearance and with the extension of d.t.x. to downtown. this is the next layer on top to look for long range of vision. continuing to see that evolution
and upgrades coming in overtime. it's an exciting process that you laid out for the region and certainly we're very supportive of continuing to work with caltrain how the entire system works. thank you. >> thank you very much. i think you would say, we are growing. the numbers are high. the high scenario probably where we need to look at. thank you. >> you have two members of the public. we have mr. patrick and mr. lebron. >> jim patrick from patrick and company. i like to go back to my shoe. you remember the shoe. we shot ourselves in the foot.
we are going to shoot ourselves in the foot again. we heard this presentation he talk about moving the envelope. we need to move the shoe, not the envelope. the envelope is not doing the job. ever heard of a tunnel under transbay? 20-year plans what will the ridership be, what would the riliership be? number two the corridor. we're talking about the corridor. they have a monopolistic right to that corridor. why can't caltrain go underneath. how about stopping at the treasure island? how about stopping if emeryville? what about stopping in alameda. what about stopping in oakland. you're making a 20-year plan. you need to push the shoe. you don't need to push the
envelope. i would reject this plan. ask them to go back to their board, rethink little bit more about moving more people, more effectively. get off the corridor kick and get on moving people around effectively. we missed it. don't shoot ourselves in the foot again. thank you. >> that's a tough act to beat. i want to talk about he said and the comments i made at the board meeting. high speed rail authority was working to get a experience terminal at fourth and king. i brought to board commission,
that clearly clarifies the bond act that determine it's a transbay and not fourth and king. having said that, the same ruling says as long as they don't use bonds, they can build whatever you want to build. going back to this. interest. you got to attract for 12 trains. only way you can achieve that is to start think being what you're doing with the d.t.x. and your approach on second street. right now, it's burning half the transbay box. it's a problem.
first problem that you have to address. director -- at that point in time, you will no longer need three tracks on the approach to d.t.x. for the same reason bart need more than two tracks in and out of market street. this is where you need to go. you have to start planning not just for the redesign of the d.t.x. but across the bay at the same time. very quickly on the backup
solution, you definitely have an opportunity if it's proper design, to turn trains around in brisbane. then you can have a full bus bridge to make the connection to downtown. i testified and asked for resignation that this is not possible. it's a high speed rail design. nothing to do with caltrain. >> that concludes your agenda for today. >> chair nuru: we are adjourned. >> thank you.